Free Movement of Goods Article 34 and 36 Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

unaffixed Movement of Goods Article 34 and 36 - turn out ExampleThe aspect of measures can also include the inaction of a State to stop private individuals acts, which prevent the free movement of goods (The College of Law 2012, p200). The ECJ describe the expression of quantitative restriction as measures that amount to partial or total restraint of, based on the circumstances, exports, imports or goods in transit. There atomic number 18 two laws that apply in this category but in this case, the most applicable law is the outright ban enforced by a appendage State (Spain) on imports from another Member State (The College of Law 2012, p201). Free Pork Ltd plans to begin selling its products in Spain have been hampered by the law that requires the change of sausages produced from humanely reared pigs to be checked by Spanish Sausage Checkers (SSC). If the sausages are not checked by SSC, the law prohibits its sales in Spain. However, the deal of verifying whether the sausages hav e those conditions is usually lengthy. Therefore, Free Pork can challenge this Spanish law. There is also a law that requires the name of the company not to use words that imply health or fitness. Free Pork can also challenge this law because it restricts the importation of goods and can affect the patsy image of the company. The SSC is a form of a licencing system, which according to the articles, subjects the import of merchandises to the condition of getting an import licence. Even in situations where the application for an import licence is regarded a mere formality it is a Quantitative Restriction. This is because is simply a mechanism in which imports can be restricted. In practice, it is very rare for the Member States laws to go out to quantitative restrictions. The ban on exports or imports between Member States is only found in unusual circumstances (The College of Law 2012, p201). Therefore, failure by Free Pork Ltd to meet the conditions set by the Spanish laws is an o utright ban on exporting sausages to this Member State. As stated earlier, the ban only happens in unusual circumstances, and thus, Free Pork can challenge the law because an unusual circumstance lacks, which prohibits it from exporting the goods to Spain. The directive was important in developing a apprize wording of the Article 34 TFEU (Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union) and it continues to offer guidance on the measures that can constitute a breach of Article 34 TFEU prohibitions. Article 2(1) of the directive describes a class of measures (for instance, national laws) that treat imported goods and domestic goods differently. They are commonly referred to as distinctly applicable measures. Article 3 of the directive describes a class of national laws that apply equally to imported and domestic products. These laws have a restrictive impact and they are commonly referred to as indistinctly applicable (The College of Law 2012, p202). Therefore, the directive classifi es both indistinctly and distinctly applicable measures as measures that have an impact equivalent to restrictions on imports. From the statement, it can be stated that a national law can become MEQR (Measures having Equivalent effect to a Quantitative Restriction) regardless of whether it discriminates against imported products or appears to treat them in the same way as domestic products but is in